On Wed, 29 Oct 2003, Tim Jenness wrote:
> It occurs to me that specifically for SLA, using GPL rather than LGPL is
> warranted since that means commercial companies will not want to use the
> "free" version since they would have to GPL their applications, providing
> a reason for them to pay for the C implementation. (I'm imagining here
> that most commercial companies would not want to open up their source
> code)/
>
> Will that overcome the objections to a GPL slalib?
Richard Stallman's short essay on the topic of LGPL/GPL for libraries is
a good introduction to the pros and cons for those who are not
too familiar with these issues (like me):
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/why-not-lgpl.html
--
Mark Taylor Starlink Programmer Physics, Bristol University, UK
[log in to unmask] 0117 928 8776 http://www.star.bris.ac.uk/~mbt/
|